112 NOTES AND QUERIES. 12 S. X. FEB. 11, 1922. Denny, Esq., of London, by whom she was mother of Sir Edmund Denny, Baron of the Exchequer, ^ c. 2. Robert Troutbeck of Trafford, Cheshire, dead by 1508. He is said to have been the third son of Sir William Troutbeck of Durham (son and heir of John) by Margaret Stanley, his wife, and brother of Sir William and Adam. But he may in reality have been the son of Miles Troutbeck of Astbury, who was probably a brother of the first William (the founder). In the Visitations, &c., Robert Trout- beck is said to have had a daughter and co-heiress, Mary, who married (as second wife) Sir Edmund . Denny, above named, and was the mother by i him of the Right Hon. Sir Anthony Denny and many other children. I shou'd be very glad to obtain any further information concerning Agnes and Robert Troutbeck. I have, however, recently obtained | evidence which tends to sLow that Mary, ! wife of Sir Edmund Denny, may have been j the daughter of John Coke of Newbury, Beds, and not a Troutbeck, in which case the Troutbeck coat, differenced with a mullet, which was quartered by Sir An h< >ny Denny, would no doubt have been brought in by the above-named Agnes. The Troutbeck pedigrees in the Harleian MSS. are very unsatisfactory. The best printed pedigrees are those in The Warrington Guardian for June, &c., 1878 (by W. Beamont), and in Earwaker's c St. Mary's, Chester.' If the Troutbeck documents which are, I understand, in the possession of the Earl of Shrewsbury could be properly examined they would, no doubt, throw much light on this subject. (REV.) H. L. L. DENNY. St. Mark's Vicarage, 60, Myddelton Square, MEILER MAGRATH, ARCHBISHOP OF CASHEL (12 S. viii, 470 ; x. 59). The following is a copy from ' Some Funeral Entries of Ireland,' published in vol. xi.,No. 3, Part II., of the Association for the Preservation of the Memorials of the Dead in Ireland, 1909, p. 106 : (257) The Bt. Reverd. Father in God Mil- , erius Magrath Lod. Archbishopp of Chashell, died 9br the 14th 1622. He had to wife Amy | Daughter of John o Mare of Lysiriusga in Co. j Tipperary, by whom he had issue Tirlough, Red- j mond, Brien, Markes, James, Mary, Cicely, Ann <fc Ellis. He is buried in the Cathedll. Church | Chashell, call'd St. Patricks. The following are notes from the writer's pedigree of the family : 1. Tirlough, married Catherine, daughter of Edmund Butler, 1st Baron Dunboyne, and ! was ancestor of the Magraths, Baronets cf Ard- ! mollane, Co. Tipperary, created June 5, 1629. 2. Redmond, of Ballyniore, Co. Tipperary, was- ancestor of the family which was trans- , planted to Lecarrow, in the Co. Clare. He was living hi 166J, and was then 90 years old. 3. Bryan, or Barnaby, of Bleane, Co. Tip- perary, married Mary, daughter of Phillip- O'Dwyer of Kilnamanagh, Co. Tipporary, and wa"s ancestor of the family of Bleane. Ho died in 1 629 .. 4. Marcus, married Catherine, daughter of Thomas Butler of Ardmayle, and also Frances, daughter of Thomas Stracye of Ardbally, Co, Kerry. He had issue and died April 14, 1639. 5. James, had a grant of lands, 1610. i. Mary, married Malcolm Hamilton. ii. Cicely, or Giles, married, first, John Butler of Ardiinnian,Co. Tipperary, and, secondly, John O'Dwyer of Dundrum, Co. Tipperary. iii. Ann, married James Butler of Kilmoyler,. Co. Tipperary. iv. Ellis, married Sir John Bowen, Knt., of Ballyadams. The writer knows nothing of Meiler's second wife, but has a good deal of informa- tion about the descendants of his sons. He is much interested in the genealogy of the family, and will be glad to give any further information in his possession to- G. F. R. 'B. and to receive some from him, or from MR. J. B. WHITMORE, who writes at the second reference. T. BLAKE BUTLER. 49, Stanhope Gardens, S.W.7. LAUNCHING OF SKIPS (12 S. x. 31, 76). Yes, ships are launched stern first for mecha- nical reasons. The greatest depth, beam, and weight are aft, and when the stern is waterborne in launching it keeps the vessel on an even keel. If launched bow first, the vessel would go right under, owing to the sharp bow and paucity of beam. In a few instances determined by local considerations- vessels are built broadside to the water, and are so launched. F. J. H. Your correspondent CAPT. W. JAGGARD gives incorrect reasons for launching a ship stern first. Motion is obtained by the de- clivity of ways, and bow or stern first makes no difference to the momentum. A number of technical details point to stern first being the most suitable method. Consideration should be given to the following : De- clivity of building berth ; declivity of launch- ing ways ; difference in draught forward and aft ; on leaving the ways prevention of " tipping " by a preponderance in buoyancy moment ; the shape of the bow with regard to clearing the end of the berth as. the vessel becomes waterborne. Vessels are launched sideways when the canal or river is too narrow for a launch iit the usual way. A. M. I. N. A.
Page:Notes and Queries - Series 12 - Volume 10.djvu/142
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.